KARUPANNA GOUNDER SUBRAMANIAM,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, CORP. WARD-5(3), CHENNAI

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl/JCIT (A)-7, Mumbai, (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(A)”), dated 11.06.2024 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as "AY”) 2011-12.

At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee admitted that the appeal has been filed belatedly by ‘205’ days and the reason for the delay has been elaborated in the affidavit as well as the condonation application filed before us. Having gone through the contents of the affidavit and the application for condonation of delay, we note that due to ill-health of the assessee [which is supported by relevant medical records], the assessee was not able to access the Income Tax portal, because of which, he couldn’t know the fate of the impugned order passed by the Ld.CIT(A)/ Addl/JCIT (A)-7, Mumbai. Since the assessee was in the dark about the fate of the impugned order and came to know only few days before filing of this appeal, the delay of ‘205’ days had occurred. Therefore, assesse pleads for condoning the delay in filing of appeal before this Tribunal.

Per contra, the Ld.DR doesn’t want us to give one more innings to the assessee.

Having heard both the parties and after perusal of the records especially the affidavit as well as the application for condonation of delay, we note that the assessee due to ill-health had to be frequently hospitalized and due to that, he couldn’t access the Income Tax portal which led to passing of ex parte order by the Ld.CIT(A). And since, the assessee was not aware of the fate of the impugned order and came to know about it only few days before filing of appeal before this Tribunal, he can’t be faulted, unless it is shown that the assessee got any advantage by not prosecuting his case before the Ld.CIT(A); Having considered the relevant medical records placed before us in order to support the case of the assessee being frequently hospitalized, we are of the view that the delay caused in filing of appeal before this Tribunal was not deliberate and hence, we condone the delay and proceed to hear the appeal on its own merits.

As noted the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) is an ex parte order since the assessee didn’t respond to his various notices. It is noted that the assessee was not able to keep a track of the proceedings happening before the Ld.CIT(A) due to non-access to the Income Tax portal because of his frequent hospitalization. Hence, we are inclined to grant one more opportunity to the assessee, provided assessee remits cost of Rs.5,000/- which the assessee should remit to the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court, and produce necessary proof of depositing of the same before the Ld.CIT(A) and then, the Ld.CIT(A) to adjudicate the grounds of appeal after hearing the assessee in accordance to law. The Ld.AR has undertaken to appear/file written submissions and also file relevant documents to support the grounds of appeal preferred before the rkrish1980@kramkrish.com

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.